Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IBeTrippin t1_ireqflo wrote

Reply to comment by corrado33 in TIL A 2017 study found that the introduction of iodized salt in 1924 raised the IQ for the one-quarter of the population most deficient in iodine. by kstinfo

My town just got rid of Fluorine. The people making the decision were mostly scientists. There's a number of reasons to do so besides 'fluorine is bad'. One of the reasons was its mostly sourced in China, and the purity is questionable at the very least, meaning they were dumping who-knows-what industrial sludge into the water.

17

corrado33 t1_irjs39z wrote

So... let me get this straight....

Instead of just... finding a better source.... they decided to deal with the worse dental health of all their citizens?

Sounds like an extremely stupid reason to take fluoride out.

1

IBeTrippin t1_irlocu5 wrote

Its a good thing they had a variety of reasons then. Including there's not a ton of evidence it helps in this era of fluoride toothpaste. We started putting it in water back before fluoride toothpaste was available. So is it still providing the benefit it did, now that almost everybody is already directly applying it to their teeth? Probably not. Places without it are doing just fine.

Plus there's cost/benefit. What other good can they do with the million dollars they save? Can that money go to making the water cleaner and safer?

1

corrado33 t1_irpcp19 wrote

> Places without it are doing just fine.

Places without it don't have the high sugar diet that places with it do.

You can't compare apples with oranges.

> What other good can they do with the million dollars they save? Can that money go to making the water cleaner and safer?

Honestly? Doubtful. With the mass amounts of corruption we see in almost any government I can almost guarantee that money is "forgotten about" and ends up in government leaders' pockets.

1